Hotaru

Members
  • Content count

    670
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1660 Excellent

4 Followers

About Hotaru

  • Rank
    Junior Rocket Scientist

Recent Profile Visitors

5662 profile views
  1. Some Disassembly Required

    I don't know--they look like they'd make great little escape pods. Extremely cool. I wonder how they'd handle reentry at higher speeds.
  2. Personally, I find autostrutting a couple of the most distant parts of the ship to the root is often enough to minimize wobble. I've never had kraken attacks due to autostruts except times when I went completely overboard and autostrutted basically every part of a very complex vehicle. So unless you think they're cheating (I disagree, but I can see the argument for it since there are no restrictions on using them) or for some reason they're more kraken-inducing for you than for me (always possible given differences in hardware), there's not much reason not to use autostruts as long as you don't go too crazy with them. PS. @Magzimum It's possible that the multi-port connector in the image is itself a bit flexible, which could account for the failure of the ports to line up properly. Maybe try a bi- or tri-coupler with docking ports attached, that might be sturdier and therefore more likely to have all the ports connect up properly. (Or just unlock the Sr. ports, that works too.)
  3. HSP: Business as usual.

    Not so much of an update this time, but it's been a week or two and I wanted to get something up for the occasion of the H. S. P.'s first anniversary. This is also the first update from my new computer, which is performing just about as well as I could have hoped for. Funnily enough, since I've always tended to prioritize visuals over performance the only major differences in the screenshots (other than slightly higher-resolution clouds) are the return of Stock Visual Terrain, Scatterer water effects, and terrain scatters. In the long run though, it's the increase in part-count limits that will make the biggest difference by allowing for much more elaborate missions than I've done so far. LC-1 returns to Mun station Persistence with the returning crew of Base Constancy. Duna system ops. KS-5: crew rotation. Daring 6: back from Jool.
  4. Could be wrong, haven't used it yet, but I believe the Kaptain's Log mod by @linuxgurugamer does pretty much this: records, among lots of other things, any change in funds, science or rep. Not sure how easy or otherwise it'd be to turn the data it exports into an actual graph mind you, but it would give you the information. (It'd still be a nifty addition to the stock game though.)
  5. HSP: Business as usual.

    Boring stuff: TL;DR: Next update--new computer! The eighth kerbonaut class with Dauntless 2101. Left to right: Heidi, Kevin, Jantrice, Sonburry, Asrine, Urjorie, Debina, Eriby, Piper, Milotte and Grathy. KS-4 and Starbus Arnold: crew rotation and a new passenger rocket. Philosophy 1: Eve and Kerbol. Daring 7: next stop, Laythe!
  6. Interestingly, it turns out that setting SAS to radial out while in surface mode has the same effect, automatically orienting to vertical. With careful positioning of parts this can also be used as a simplistic wing-leveler autopilot for airplanes.
  7. [1.3] BARIS - Building A Rocket Isn't Simple

    @Pand5461 Yes, as separate patches working together they should cover all cases. I don't think there are any stock parts that have both crew and fuel but no command, but there are undoubtedly mod parts, so a check for crew capacity is certainly a good idea.
  8. [1.3] BARIS - Building A Rocket Isn't Simple

    @Pand5461 I don't know, I'm inclined to doubt it--since that would require checking in both the resource definitions and the part config at the same time, which I don't think MM can do--but I'm no expert. And I believe that patch would require ModuleCommand, and therefore would only work for probe cores. To make it work for both regular fuel tanks and probe cores, but still exclude kermanned pods and passenger cabins, I believe you'd want this: @PART[*]:HAS[@RESOURCE[MonoPropellant],!MODULE[ModuleBreakableFuelTank],#CrewCapacity[0]]:FOR[BARIS] { MODULE { name = ModuleBreakableFuelTank } } Although I'm not completely sure if that would work for parts where crew capacity is not specified. (Easy enough to find out, though.) Again, I'm no MM expert. Do bear in mind those patches I wrote were little more than a quick-and-dirty fix to the problem of "category=FuelTank" failing to cover some of the stock parts. I suspect a more elegant solution than mine is possible.
  9. [1.3] BARIS - Building A Rocket Isn't Simple

    OK, I know I said you wouldn't hear from me again but seeing as this is actually kind of my fault: you're right, the MM patches check for any part with liquid fuel, monoprop or xenon resource containers, including pods. The relevant patch is this one: @PART[*]:HAS[@RESOURCE[MonoPropellant],!MODULE[ModuleBreakableFuelTank]]:FOR[BARIS] { MODULE { name = ModuleBreakableFuelTank } } To exclude command pods, I believe this version should work instead (I'm in the wrong OS right now to actually check): @PART[*]:HAS[@RESOURCE[MonoPropellant],!MODULE[ModuleBreakableFuelTank],!MODULE[ModuleCommand]]:FOR[BARIS] { MODULE { name = ModuleBreakableFuelTank } } PS. The patch in question is found in GameData\WildBlueIndustries\000BARIS\ModuleManagerPatches\MM_BARIS.cfg.
  10. VAB delete

    Personally, having lost work to this issue more than once myself, I think a message to the effect of "Caution: vessel has detached parts that will be lost if you proceed" before saving or exiting the VAB would be an extremely good idea. And for everybody saying this is OP's own mistake--it is and it isn't. Operator error is connected to human factors engineering: human users will always make mistakes, but a well-designed UI will usually catch or prevent them. In a case like this, where the mistake is common, potentially serious, and reasonably easy to detect, I can't think of a reason why the user shouldn't be warned about it.
  11. [1.3] BARIS - Building A Rocket Isn't Simple

    Fair enough. You will not hear from me again.
  12. [1.3] BARIS - Building A Rocket Isn't Simple

    @Angel-125 Thank you for having the thread reopened. I did do some more testing between my last post here and when the thread was closed. Would you like to hear the results? I entirely understand if you've heard enough from me by now, but I would still like to be helpful* if possible. (PS. *Admittedly this is in contradiction to my previous remarks, but I'm not above eating my words if circumstances change.)
  13. Baris Appreciation Thread

    Just don't. I'd prefer to leave it at that. It's not a subject I feel would be appropriate to discuss in public anyway. It's pinned because it was made a thread of the month.
  14. Baris Appreciation Thread

    Thanks for the advice, but at this point I don't feel comfortable continuing to use BARIS, let alone recompile it, even privately.
  15. HSP: Business as usual.

    Boring stuff: TL;DR: the usual. Lucidity 5: the surface of Laythe.